JaimeNina

So, here is my speculation. It seems like they went through and did all the auto-admits who went complete up until 12/15. Then they went through and did a round of rejects through 12/15. Now, they should do the same for the next batch, working their way through auto-admits, then going back and doing chronological rejections from 12/16 through, say 1/31. When both of these rounds are done, they'll sort through who's left for last-minute admits, waitlists, and rejects. Any thoughts?

faultytowers

But I think there's something to be said for the deceasing qualifications of admits as the cycle continues. I believe as we get towards the very end of the cycle, there will be some admits that don't have the 3.5index/3.9gpa that has so far been determinative of success.

Interesting theory on the East Coast bias. You're right, they did make a big deal out of the Form C (which I did not submit, entirely because I wanted to make things easier for my recommenders). I'm expecting to be rejected--I have a middle 50% GPA and way above 75% LSAT, which is much in line with other folks accepted at Harvard and rejected at Stanford. I thought my essay and recommendations were good, but I don't know if they're good enough to overcome some deep sentiment that I'm going to pick Harvard over them.

Anyway, if that's the case, I think that's pretty foul. If I were accepted, I would fly out there and visit and give them a fair shake just like I'm giving everyone else. For them to presume that I would be all starry-eyed with Harvard...it's not really a fair assumption. And I think they'd probably be selling themselves short on a bunch of good students. But if they think they have to do it to protect their yield, I guess that's their business.

(And not to harp on this or anything, because I don't know if it's true, but that would be a really crummy strategy for the development of your law school as well. If your concern is that students on the East Coast are turning down Stanford because it's not on the East Coast, or it's not Harvard, or what have you, then you do yourself a disservice in refusing them admission. You don't even give that 1 student in 8 or 10 a chance to pick Stanford over Harvard, to report back to his friends on the East Coast, to report back to his pre-law adviser, to tell everyone how much he loves the school. Your concerns about East Coast kids disrespecting you become a self-fulfilling prophecy, and you become just a small step up from a regionally prestigious law school. Which some might argue is exactly what Stanford is. So if that's their strategy, then good luck catching Harvard and Yale.

...Sorry, but I'm really opinionated on this subject because I was a tourguide at Duke undergrad and spent my life trying to convince students that the world wouldn't end if they chose Duke over Harvard. Duke, to its credit, does not yield-protect, and if that means our yield stays under 50%, so be it! Because I know that our classes are enriched by those students we might have rejected through yield protection, but chose to attend Duke anyway. You gotta aim high. You just gotta.)